W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > June 2001

Re: URI etymology

From: Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN <champin@bat710.univ-lyon1.fr>
Date: 15 Jun 2001 16:30:28 +0200
To: Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN <champin@bat710.univ-lyon1.fr>
Cc: Sean "B." Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Message-Id: <992615429.3495.1.camel@lisiperso3>
To follow what I just sent...

I'm quite sure, by the way, that in some given applications, URIs will
be "misused", i.e. used to identify other things that the one resource
they theoreticaly identify; and the context will allow agents to handle

But the theoretical ground must be solid; some application will need it
(e-commerce being the most evident).
Build context-driven applications on strict foundations is easier than
building strict application on a swamp ;-) IMHO


On 15 Jun 2001 16:21:30 +0200, Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN wrote:
> On 15 Jun 2001 14:46:32 +0100, Sean B. Palmer wrote:
> > The question here is about trust and authority. If I say that I only
> > trust a piece of RDF using your homepage as a URI in it somewhere if
> > and only if it is digitally signed by a digital signature that I know
> > is from you, then I can be "sure" that the context of its use will be
> > the one that is "correct" to you.
> Sean,
> I think we are not talking about the same problem.
> *My* question is not, IMHO, about trust and authority;
> I'm not concerned about what a SW agent will *believe* a URI identifies,
> I'm concerned about what the URI *does* identify truly.
> I'm not discussing about implementation,
> I'm discussing about theory.
> Of course, implementation problems are a bunch, and must indeed be
> addressed.
> But I do not think we all agree on the theory (which URI identifies
> what),
> and I think we should reach agreement,
> or how could the SW agent we develop agree with each other ?
>   Pierre-Antoine
Received on Friday, 15 June 2001 10:29:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:36 UTC